What does KotCS do better?
- Thread starter JP Jones
- Start date
DocWhiskey
Well-known member
What did it do better, eh?
Hmmmmmmmm.
You know, I honestly can't think of anything.
No, I'm not a hater, I love it. But it just didn't do anything "better" in my eyes. The previous 3 are still superior in almost every way. I'd love to read what others think though.
Hmmmmmmmm.
You know, I honestly can't think of anything.
No, I'm not a hater, I love it. But it just didn't do anything "better" in my eyes. The previous 3 are still superior in almost every way. I'd love to read what others think though.
Darth Vile
New member
As someone who likes the movie... I can't really think of much it did substantially better than the first three (that’s not a criticism, but more of recognition that it was great at giving us more of the same)... However, I do think the set design is pretty outstanding. I also think KOTCS employs the use of effects better than both TOD and TLC... which in turn, opens up the scope of the movie (visually speaking) e.g. Peru, the jungle, Akator seem a lot more substantial.
In summary... I think Raiders has the most quintessential "Indy" plot/treasure hunt type thing, best dialogue and direction. TLC has the best protagonist dynamic e.g. Indy and Henry Jones Senior, and the best score. TOD probably has the best high octane action. KOTCS has the best set design/effects.
In summary... I think Raiders has the most quintessential "Indy" plot/treasure hunt type thing, best dialogue and direction. TLC has the best protagonist dynamic e.g. Indy and Henry Jones Senior, and the best score. TOD probably has the best high octane action. KOTCS has the best set design/effects.
Last edited:
Forbidden Eye
Well-known member
Hmmmmmm......
I think Kingdom of the Crystal Skull had the best Star Wars reference.
I think Kingdom of the Crystal Skull had the best Star Wars reference.
Darth Vile
New member
Forbidden Eye said:
"That's no moon"?
I really think the production design in this movie rivals and possibly in some areas even exceeds that of the other films. I'm sure much of this has to do with the budget, but Guy Dyas also just puts in some impressive, creative work here - he definitely took the responsibility of working on a new Indiana Jones movie seriously.
Otherwise, I guess I can't think of ways where the movie bests the previous ones, but the potential was definitely there, and I dismiss the notion that the movie "couldn't" have done so due to the age of the franchise or some such nonsense.
I will say that Ford is probably at least as good as he was in the previous movies. I'd also say the same thing about the story - I enjoyed the mythologies the movie blends together (mixing El Dorado with the Akakor myth with the phenomenon of the Nazca lines is fun and very Indy stuff). Too bad the screenwriting (storytelling) utterly lets it down and renders most of the effort that came into concocting the yarn almost utterly useless and difficult to appreciate. The fact that the storytelling in Temple is way more satisfying despite being way more straightforward and less nuanced says it all. I think the cinematography is a similar story - the shot composition and camera work is excellent and very much in the Indy vein, but the ridiculous bloom lighting destroys any intent for the film to sit comfortably with the original trilogy in a visual sense. This constant struggle between "awesome" and "really bad" is one I feel is present throughout the whole movie. I don't find the overall quality of the movie to be either of those extremes, but it definitely makes it by far the most uneven feeling movie in the series for me.
Otherwise, I guess I can't think of ways where the movie bests the previous ones, but the potential was definitely there, and I dismiss the notion that the movie "couldn't" have done so due to the age of the franchise or some such nonsense.
I will say that Ford is probably at least as good as he was in the previous movies. I'd also say the same thing about the story - I enjoyed the mythologies the movie blends together (mixing El Dorado with the Akakor myth with the phenomenon of the Nazca lines is fun and very Indy stuff). Too bad the screenwriting (storytelling) utterly lets it down and renders most of the effort that came into concocting the yarn almost utterly useless and difficult to appreciate. The fact that the storytelling in Temple is way more satisfying despite being way more straightforward and less nuanced says it all. I think the cinematography is a similar story - the shot composition and camera work is excellent and very much in the Indy vein, but the ridiculous bloom lighting destroys any intent for the film to sit comfortably with the original trilogy in a visual sense. This constant struggle between "awesome" and "really bad" is one I feel is present throughout the whole movie. I don't find the overall quality of the movie to be either of those extremes, but it definitely makes it by far the most uneven feeling movie in the series for me.
Last edited:
Agent Crab
New member
..Okay...
Whatever you are smoking.. can I have some?
Whatever you are smoking.. can I have some?
Udvarnoky said:
The irony, of course, is that these are generally the two that give people the most trouble.
What gives KOTCS a slight edge (for me) is the way it steadily channels 50s pulp the entire time. Each major sequence could've essentially been lifted from the cover of something like Amazing Stories: "Indy and the Mushroom Cloud!"; "Graverobbers vs. The Undead!"; "Mind Stealers of the Amazon!"; "Among The Atomic Ants!"; "The Phantom City of the Gods!"; etc.
One thing that impressed me on opening night was how far they actually took the sci-fi aspect. I assumed that after TOD, they would always stick to playing it safe.
Two scenes in particular- the gunpowder in Hangar 51 and Indy's psychic interrogation- really stuck out as pleasant surprises. This was stuff straight out of Doc Savage territory, and not anything I had been expecting to find.
I honestly thought the pulp elements (ie. fridge; interrogation; ants; etc.) would be what fans were talking about afterwards. And technically, some of those things did spark discussion...just not quite the way I had assumed.
James said:
Nothing unexpected about it, though. Raiders was the first, and Last Crusade went the crowd-pleaser route by rehashing it.
James said:
I agree, though the same is undoubtedly true about Temple of Doom and 1930s pulp along the lines of Gunga Din. Like with Skull, still images taken from most scenes could double as panels of a comic book. Know what I mean?
It should be said though, that all four Indy movies are incredibly well photographed films that capture well the spirit we're both alluding to. Even Last Crusade, the least inspired one of them all, has shots like the one of young Indy peering over the ledge in the caves while the looters dig for their treasure. I could look at screenshots from the movies all day - and I did appreciate the way Indy4 retained the signature emphasis on composition, wide angles and long takes that sets it apart from more frenetic, modern action films.
James said:
They played it safe in other ways. For every outlandish idea in Indy4 is a compromise, even down to the very nature of the premise - Lucas would have had us watching Indy literally chasing down flying saucers, after all. There are a lot of wacky things in Indy4 that surprised me, but for every one of those the film makers still had something to fall back on to ensure that $780 million dollar haul, like the casting of a hip teen heart-throb like Shia. It might be ludicrous on some level to call anything about the fourth entry in a gigantic, surefire franchise like Indiana Jones a genuine "risk," at all.
I don't mean that as a criticism or anything, just an observation. It's not like having an Asian kid sidekick for Indy in Temple was any less cynical than the "mainstream" decisions I'd point out in Crystal Skull.
James said:
Still, it can't be that surprising. The more stupid aspects from the original trilogy that people still whine about tend to be the most accurate to the series' pulp inspirations. I think Temple of Doom and Crystal Skull, although traditionally the black sheep of the series (from the perspective of general audiences in the case of Temple and Indy4 and the Beards in the case of Temple...though Indy4 is still young), are the episodes that are arguably the truest to Lucas and Spielberg's original vision. One can't help but wonder if the cranked up insanity and pulpiness of Temple of Doom had to do with the (relatively) larger budget to Raiders. Raiders was all about Spielberg learning how to make a movie rough and dirty for peanuts and incredible stress of time after the bloated productions of Jaws, Close Encounters, and 1941.
I can't help but feel that going into Temple after coming off of Raiders as Mr. Efficient, Spielberg completely unleashed himself when making the movie (possibly to even out his apparent apathy for the story). That movie is the epitome example of Spielberg running wild (for better or for worse). There's no question in my mind that the unending "out of the frying pan, into the fire" style of Temple of Doom makes it the most like a real adventure serial out of all the Indy flicks. Everything about that movie, from the relentless energy, to the unbridled creativity, to the manipulative emotions, to the cringe-inducing and heavy-handed sentimentality is pure, unadulterated Steven Spielberg. Sometimes I wonder if that's why he's so cold on it. In a number of ways it's a knowingly indulgent and undisciplined (though very well-crafted) film, but for the kind of movie it is that's exactly what's called for. Personally, I think it's those qualities of Temple of Doom (including the cheese), that makes it work so well. Indy4's got nearly the level of pulp, but for me none of the energy.
Last edited:
Udvarnoky said:
Yes, the prologue of LC really captured the whole boys' adventure genre that was prominent when Lucas and Spielberg were kids.
I'm reminded of the screenshot thread we had here last year. There was a lot of surprise over many great shots had actually been employed in the film.
I do think TOD and LC are probably closest to what Indy was always intended to be- certainly from Lucas' perspective. This becomes even clearer when you look at the rejected ideas like haunted castles, monkey kings, and saucer battles. In a way, it's a shame we didn't get one or two more "crazy" sequels in the late 80s or early 90s. Perhaps then so many people wouldn't try to limit the series to stuff that happened in 1981.
There's also a strong case to be made for Spielberg letting himself get carried away with both those installments. I know he admitted something similar when discussing KOTCS.
I don't see why people are so surprised when I say KotCS has some better stuff in it. The ants were simply the coolest creepy crawlies, they were fun unique and quite scary. That transfered to the fight. "Big Damn Ants!" was the most perfect of all the Indy fights. And I'm not ashamed to say that's it's my favorite Indiana Jones moment."I have a dream, that one day, it will be O.K for someone to like parts of kotcs more than parts of rotla"
If you think I'm some kind of freak because I like kotcs tell me why.
If you think I'm some kind of freak because I like kotcs tell me why.
DocWhiskey
Well-known member
You're not a freak because you like kotcs, man.
A good majority on here really enjoy it. After all this is an Indiana Jones message board.
Early after KOTCS's release, I figured (hoped) that it would pull a ToD, meaning as time passed it got more and more praise until eventually it was a "worthy" Indiana Jones film.
And frankly, a little over a year later, I see that happening. If you logged in here May 25th 2008 there were so many negative threads. So many people bashing it. And it was crazy on how much backlash a person would receive if they said they "liked it".
But now it's different. It's perfectly fine to say you liked it, even loved it. It's the new black sheep of the series. And us die hard fans are starting to warm up to it and hopefully the "normies" will follow And if they don't? Who cares.
ToD got worse critical reception when it was released and it's my favorite Indy film. And I think a reason why is because it got a such negative reception. I had low expectations and when I first seen it I didn't understand why people were so hard on it. The same will happen with KOTCS. Maybe it has already.
People will blow the nuking fridges, aliens, and monkey swinging so out of proportion that when a new viewer sits down to watch it they'll say, "That's it? That's what they were moaning about?"
I talked to a lot of "fans" at Chicago Comic Con and all their complaints were "nuclear fridges" "Tarzan swinging" and "George Lucas wanted it to be Star Wars" blah blah blah. And most of the people who said that told me how they hated ToD and KOTCS took the cake for worst Indy film. So there's no reasoning with them
But on the bright side, there were many young fans who told me they loved all 4 films. For they are our successors. The new generations of Indyfans.
Even though I was very disappointed with KOTCS when I first seen it, my additional viewings only got better. My expectations were too high (as was everyones) and when they were lowered, that's when I truly enjoyed it.
KotCS is fun entertaining homage to 50's Scifi B movies with a pulp flair. And now that I see it that way, it fits in perfectly with the originally trilogy. My only regret is that I wish I had that in mind viewing it on May 20th.
I think KOTCS having the black sheep angle going for it will only make it get better reception in the future.
And who knows. Years and years down the line, perhaps the Raven will be filled with new young members who's fathers brought them to see KOTCS introducing them to Indiana Jones. And it's now their favorite Indy film.
Only time will tell.
A good majority on here really enjoy it. After all this is an Indiana Jones message board.
Early after KOTCS's release, I figured (hoped) that it would pull a ToD, meaning as time passed it got more and more praise until eventually it was a "worthy" Indiana Jones film.
And frankly, a little over a year later, I see that happening. If you logged in here May 25th 2008 there were so many negative threads. So many people bashing it. And it was crazy on how much backlash a person would receive if they said they "liked it".
But now it's different. It's perfectly fine to say you liked it, even loved it. It's the new black sheep of the series. And us die hard fans are starting to warm up to it and hopefully the "normies" will follow
And if they don't? Who cares. ToD got worse critical reception when it was released and it's my favorite Indy film. And I think a reason why is because it got a such negative reception. I had low expectations and when I first seen it I didn't understand why people were so hard on it. The same will happen with KOTCS. Maybe it has already.
People will blow the nuking fridges, aliens, and monkey swinging so out of proportion that when a new viewer sits down to watch it they'll say, "That's it? That's what they were moaning about?"
I talked to a lot of "fans" at Chicago Comic Con and all their complaints were "nuclear fridges" "Tarzan swinging" and "George Lucas wanted it to be Star Wars" blah blah blah. And most of the people who said that told me how they hated ToD and KOTCS took the cake for worst Indy film. So there's no reasoning with them
But on the bright side, there were many young fans who told me they loved all 4 films. For they are our successors. The new generations of Indyfans.Even though I was very disappointed with KOTCS when I first seen it, my additional viewings only got better. My expectations were too high (as was everyones) and when they were lowered, that's when I truly enjoyed it.
KotCS is fun entertaining homage to 50's Scifi B movies with a pulp flair. And now that I see it that way, it fits in perfectly with the originally trilogy. My only regret is that I wish I had that in mind viewing it on May 20th.
I think KOTCS having the black sheep angle going for it will only make it get better reception in the future.
And who knows. Years and years down the line, perhaps the Raven will be filled with new young members who's fathers brought them to see KOTCS introducing them to Indiana Jones. And it's now their favorite Indy film.
Only time will tell.
Last edited:
Darth Vile
New member
Udvarnoky said:
In a lot of ways, I feel that TOD is the most "Spielberg'esque" movie of the franchise to date (for many of the reasons you state). And again, I'd agree that TOD is the most energetic/kinetic Indy movie. Some of that non-stop action is to the detriment of the movie (IMHO), but still, it does set TOD apart from the other movies and, even today, makes it somewhat unique.
DocWhiskey said:
Good post Doc.
There's a lot of people who like it ; I know but, I'm saying when I say I liked the jungle chase more than the truck chase people think I'm crazy. They say that because Raiders is the better movie. Well at least I think it is, but I still think there are parts that were much more enjoyable in kotcs than rotla.
I haven't heard anyone tell me why I'm crazy. Is it just odd that I say that I like SOME parts better. I agree with you that over time this could be considered a classic like ToD. Mabye then people won't be so surprised that I think kotcs did a lot of things better. I think it's about time we stop saying if Indiana jones isn't fighting nazis in search for the ark of the covenant I'm not watching.
So do you see what I'm saying? people think that any Indy movie that's not Raiders can't even touch it. Especially kotcs, but I'm here to disagree, and that's what this thread is about.
I haven't heard anyone tell me why I'm crazy. Is it just odd that I say that I like SOME parts better. I agree with you that over time this could be considered a classic like ToD. Mabye then people won't be so surprised that I think kotcs did a lot of things better. I think it's about time we stop saying if Indiana jones isn't fighting nazis in search for the ark of the covenant I'm not watching.
So do you see what I'm saying? people think that any Indy movie that's not Raiders can't even touch it. Especially kotcs, but I'm here to disagree, and that's what this thread is about.
Last edited:
The Drifter
New member
mr.kotcs said:
The reason why people have not gave you a reason for being crazy is because you're not crazy.
Crystal Skull did have one of my favorite fight scenes in the films, and that was the fight right before the rocket sled.